4 ms·
I know several programmers that are many times more productive than their peers, when compared to least-performing peers it's easily 10-20x. They make a little
by distances 8y ago
I know several programmers that are many times more productive than their peers, when compared to least-performing peers it's easily 10-20x. They make a little bit more, I'd guess 20-30%.
Not in the US, but I'm sure this is quite common and compensation anywhere near reflecting the performance is a rare exception.
- maxxxxx 8y agoTotally agree. There are a few exceptions but for most people their pay is not much correlated with productivity.
- treis 8y ago>I know several programmers that are many times more productive than their peers, when compared to least-performing peers it's easily 10-20x. They make a little bit more, I'd guess 20-30%. I'm not saying the system is perfect at identifying who's the 10x engineer and who's the bum. But once identified there is definitely a gap in pay roughly equivalent to the difference in production.
- ultraluminous 8y agoWhich system is identifying the 10x engineer? What generates that gap in pay? It sorts of sounds like you are trying to fit reality into a model and not vice versa.
- treis 8y ago>Which system is identifying the 10x engineer? The compensation scheme at companies that employ them. >What generates that gap in pay? All companies are different but it's typical a difference in grade or rank.
- distances 8y agoSorry for a late reply. In most companies outside the US nobody, not even the CEO, makes 10x the income of an average low-performing engineer. A high performer has a chance of getting a respectable salary only by rising to CTO or similar roles, which obviously require skills other than just project contribution. There is literally zero chance a high performer would get even 3x salary compared to their peers. Those pay ranks simply do not exist.